36
‘METICILLIN-RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS (MRSA) IN IRELAND: ADDRESSING THE ISSUES’
‘METICILLIN-RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUSAUREUS (MRSA) IN IRELAND:ADDRESSING THE ISSUES’
Pfi zer provided an unrestricted educational grant to develop and publish this report.
Contents
Introduction 1
1 The facts about MRSA 2-4
1.1 MSSA and MRSA 2
1.2 Healthcare-associated infection 3
1.3 The risk of acquiring MRSA 4
2 The scale of the problem with MRSA in Ireland 6-11
2.1 HCAI and MRSA infection rates 6
2.2 MRSA surveillance in ICUs in Ireland 7
2.3 MRSA bloodstream infection in Ireland and in other European countries 7-9
2.4 Reporting of death associated with MRSA 10-11
3 The economic impact of MRSA related infection and colonisation 12-13
3.1 Costs to the health system 12
3.2 Costs to patients, carers and the economy 13
4 The prevention and control of MRSA colonisation and infection 14-16
4.1 Infection prevention and control 14
4.2 Antimicrobial consumption 15
4.3 Improving the prescribing of antimicrobials 16
5 The management of MRSA infection and colonisation 18-23
5.1 Communication with patients about their MRSA status 18
5.2 Treatment of S. aureus infection 19
5.3 Eradication of MRSA carriage 20
5.4 Hospital discharge of patients with MRSA 20
5.4.1 Home antibiotic treatment 22
5.4.2 Discharge planning and HCAI 23
Conclusion 25
Abbreviations 26
References 27-30
1
1
Introduction
In Ireland over the last 10 years, there has been a signifi cant degree of media attention and
political focus on healthcare-associated infection (HCAI) in general and meticillin resistant
Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in particular. In 2000, the Department of Health and Children
requested the then National Disease Surveillance Centre to make recommendations for
the prevention of antimicrobial resistance and the Strategy for the Control of Antimicrobial
Resistance in Ireland (SARI) was published in 2001. Since then, further national and
international guidance on the prevention and management of HCAI and MRSA has
become available.
This report aims to provide an accessible summary of the current position on MRSA,
particularly where it pertains to Ireland. The document has been developed to examine broader
issues in relation to the management of MRSA which may be of use to healthcare managers
and administrators, policy makers, politicians, journalists, the pharmaceutical industry, medical
insurers, hospital managers, the legal profession, patient advocacy groups and patients with
MRSA and their families.
The report has been produced by the members of a multi-disciplinary expert group including
microbiologists, hospital pharmacists and patient advocates.
Members of the Expert Group are as follows:
Dr Edmond Smyth, MB, MSc, FRCPath, FRCPI, (Chairperson), Consultant Microbiologist,
Beaumont Hospital, Dublin 9. [email protected]
Professor Martin Cormican, MD, MRCP, FRCPath, Professor of Bacteriology,
School of Medicine, NUIGalway. [email protected]
Dr Margaret Hannan, MRCPI MRCPath, Clinical Senior Lecturer UCD,
Consultant Clinical Microbiologist, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital,
Eccles Street, Dublin 7. [email protected]
Mr Stephen McMahon, CEO, Irish Patients’ Association. [email protected]
Ms Marie Philbin, MPharm MSc MRPharmS MPSI, Senior Pharmacist, Antimicrobials,
Midland Regional Hospital, Tullamore. [email protected]
Helpful feedback has been received from representative organisations for key health professionals.
Pfi zer has provided an unrestricted educational grant to develop and publish this report.
2
1 The facts about MRSA
1.1 MSSA and MRSA
Bacteria are present in the nose and on the skin of healthy individuals, they are said to colonise
these sites and are referred to as normal fl ora. The bacteria present are mainly benefi cial, but
in certain circumstances they may be associated with infection. In about one third of healthy
people, the normal fl ora includes Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus).
If S. aureus gains entry through a break in the skin, it can cause minor skin infections such as
boils and abscesses. Although it can also cause more severe disease such as life-threatening
bloodstream infection (BSI) and infective endocarditis (infection of the lining of the heart), this
is uncommon. In general S. aureus is sensitive to many fi rst-line antibiotics and infections are
generally treated with penicillins and cephalosporins, which act in a similar way against S.
aureus. Penicillins include meticillin, cloxacillin and fl ucloxacillin and cephalosporins include
cephradine and cefuroxime. Meticillin was the fi rst of these agents used in clinical practice
and by convention the term is used when referring to resistance to these antibiotics. S. aureus
which remain sensitive to these agents are generally referred to as meticillin-sensitive S. aureus
or MSSA. Resistant strains of S. aureus are designated meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus
aureus or MRSA.
MRSA was fi rst reported internationally in 1961 and recognised as a problem in Irish hospitals
in the 1980s. MRSA may be found in about 3% of the general population. It normally colonises
the same sites (nose and skin folds) as MSSA. As with MSSA, most patients colonised with
MRSA are not infected, although infection with MRSA can develop in some patients.
Treatment of infection due to MRSA is more complex than treatment of MSSA infection. It can
be more diffi cult to choose the most appropriate antibiotic treatment at the outset (before it is
known that the infection is caused by MRSA) and the range of effective antibiotics available to
treat MRSA infection is more limited. In general the outcome of serious infection with MRSA
tends to be less favourable. This may be related at least in part to the complexity of treatment
but the outcome also relates to the general health of the patient and to variations in the
virulence (ability to cause serious disease) of different strains of S. aureus.
The most common strains of MRSA are healthcare-associated are typically seen in hospitalised
patients or in those receiving treatment in other healthcare facilities such as day units and
nursing homes. In recent years, a novel strain of MRSA, designated community-acquired
MRSA has been recognised and can spread readily from person to person, often in the
community setting. It has been found in many countries, including Ireland and can cause
severe infection in otherwise healthy individuals.
3
1.2 Healthcare-associated infection
Healthcare-associated infection (HCAI) refers to infection, which is usually acquired 48 hours or
more after admission to hospital or after contact with a healthcare facility, such as a day care
unit or a nursing home, etc.1,2
HCAI can be caused by both antibiotic-susceptible and antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which
can arise from the patients’ own fl ora (endogenous) or can be acquired from other patients,
the hands of healthcare workers or from the healthcare environment (exogenous). S. aureus
(including MRSA) is a common cause of HCAI, but many other bacteria such as Escherichia
coli, Clostridium diffi cile, Pseudomonas aeruginosa etc. and viruses such as that which causes
winter vomiting disease can also lead to HCAI.
There are both patient and non-patient factors which predispose to acquisition of HCAI.
Patient factors include extremes of age, surgical and other wounds, the presence of medical
devices such as catheters and drains, severity of illness, co-morbidities, length of hospital
stay and recent surgery or ICU care. Hospital factors include poor hand-hygiene compliance,
widespread use of antimicrobials, contaminated equipment, a poorly maintained hospital
environment, delay in patient isolation, low staff-patient ratios and the inadequacy of both the
hospital infrastructure and isolation facilities.
Infections are categorised according to the site of the infection, e.g. lungs, urinary tract, skin,
bloodstream and by the causative organism. Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common
HCAI, whereas bloodstream infection (BSI) is less common but has the highest mortality.3
S. aureus BSI can lead to deep-seated infection involving the heart and lungs, the kidneys, the
spine and the liver and can be life-threatening. Figure 1 shows the sites most susceptible to
infection and where possible, defi nes the portal of entry for many of these infections.
4
1.3 The risk of acquiring MRSA
Hospitalised patients are most at risk of acquiring MRSA; most of these patients are colonised
rather than infected. The commonest colonisation sites are the nose, groin and areas of
broken/injured skin such as wounds and ulcers. In many cases colonisation does not progress
to infection, but in a subset of patients, infection does supervene and this ranges from mild
skin and soft-tissue infection to life-threatening invasive infection. The factors which infl uence
this are not fully understood but include patient susceptibility and variations in the virulence
of individual strains of MRSA. Patient risk factors associated with infection include underlying
illness (such as cancer or major trauma) and certain treatments such as central venous lines
and anti-cancer drugs.
Healthy individuals such as healthcare workers, patients’ families and household contacts of
those discharged from hospital with MRSA are at very low risk of developing MRSA infection.
Figure 1: Routes and Sites of MRSA Infection
VentilatorPneumonia
Intravenous linesBloodstream infection (BSI)
Urinary catheterUrinary tract infection and
bloodstream infection
Skin and soft tissue infectionSurgical wounds/ulcers/pressure sores
1
The HSE Infection Control Action Plan
estimates that 25,000 in-patients
develop HCAI annually in Ireland.
2 The scale of the problem with
MRSA in Ireland
2.1 HCAI and MRSA infection rates
A point prevalence study carried out in 2006 by the Hospital Infection Society (HIS) examined
the frequency of HCAI, including HCAI due to MRSA, on a given day in Ireland, England, Wales
and Scotland.4 The total number of patients surveyed in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) was
7,541, of which 369 had HCAI and 37 of these were due to MRSA.
These fi gures indicate a HCAI prevalence of 4.9% in Ireland, the lowest among the four
countries, which ranged from 4.9% to 8.19%.
In interpreting this data, it is important to consider possible factors that might explain the
apparent relatively low prevalence of HCAI in Ireland. The Irish survey included more small
hospitals with low-risk patients, perhaps refl ecting differences in healthcare provision.
Countries like the US and Australia may also have different ways of calculating rates of HCAI,
so data should be compared cautiously.
Number of patients
7451
Number of patients with HCAI
369 (4.9%)
Number of patients with
MRSA HCAI
37 (10%)
Figure 2: 2006 HIS Study, HCAI and MRSA point prevalence in ROI
6
7
Based on a 4.9% HCAI prevalence, the Health Service Executive (HSE) Infection Control Action
Plan estimated that in the order of 25,000 in-patients may develop HCAI each year.5 This fi gure
of 25,000 may well be an underestimate of the number of HCAI for the following reasons:
estimation of incidence (number of cases that occur over a period of time) from prevalence •
(the number of cases present at a specifi c time point) data has many limitations
only HCAI acquired in the reporting hospital was included•
only HCAI which met CDC surveillance defi nitions was included•
only hospitals with infection control teams participated•
2.2 MRSA surveillance in intensive care units (ICUs) in Ireland
Weekly prevalence surveillance of MRSA in Irish ICUs during 2008 reveals that the proportion
of ICU patients colonised with MRSA ranges from 2.9% to 21.2%.6 However, the number of
patients acquiring MRSA in ICUs was low at 0 to 3.3%. The report recognises that dealing
with the problem of ICU-associated MRSA is multifaceted. It is diffi cult to control MRSA
acquisition within a unit, when the patient population has a high prevalence of MRSA carriage
on admission. While most patients are screened on admission, there is still a signifi cant delay
in the identifi cation of MRSA, using culture techniques alone. The report concludes that there
is a need for rapid identifi cation of MRSA carriage, along with the provision of more isolation
rooms, facilitating prompt isolation of colonised patients, to minimise ICU-acquired MRSA.
Routine weekly prevalence surveillance has limitations and long-term enhanced surveillance
would give a more complete picture of the burden of MRSA in Irish ICUs.
2.3 MRSA bloodstream infection in Ireland and in other
European countries
According to data from the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (EARSS),
there were 1,240 reports of S. aureus bloodstream infections in Ireland in 2008; of these,
33.9% were MRSA (Figure 3).7 The provisional data for the fi rst three quarters of 2009 shows a
decline to 28% in the percentage attributed to MRSA.8 This is the lowest percentage attributed
to MRSA since surveillance began in 1999. This decline is welcome however it should be noted
that the incidence in this country is still signifi cantly higher than that seen in many other EU
countries (Figure 4) and it is appropriate to be cautious pending confi rmation of the trend over
a longer surveillance period.
8
Figure 3: European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (EARSS)
Annual Report 2008, p. 57 7
S. aureus: proportion of invasive isolates resistant to meticillin (MRSA) in 2008
*These countries did not report any data or reported less than 10 isolates
No data*
< 1%
1-5%
5-10%
10-25%
25-50%
> 50%
LU MT
Figure 4: Susceptibility results for S. aureus isolates in different EU countries in 2008 7, 8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Po
rtug
al
Gre
ece
Italy
Irela
nd
Unite
d K
ing
do
m
Sp
ain
Fra
nce
Belg
ium
Germ
any
Sw
itzerla
nd
Austria
Fin
land
Denm
ark
Neth
erla
nd
s
Sw
ed
en
No
rway
Country
Pre
vale
nce %
9
10
2.4 Reporting of death associated with MRSA
In Ireland, S. aureus BSI (both meticillin sensitive and meticillin resistant) is notifi able under the
Infectious Diseases Legislation. This means that a medical practitioner is obliged to inform the
Medical Offi cer of Health (MOH) of all cases of BSI. However, there is no legal obligation to
notify the MOH of the outcome (recovery or death) of S. aureus infection. Therefore information
on the number of deaths related to S. aureus BSI is not collected in a systematic way and there
is no reliable published data on death due to MSSA or MRSA BSI.
In response to increased public concern about MRSA, the Minister for Health and Children
wrote to the HSE in December 2005 recommending that ‘MRSA should be recorded on death
certifi cates, when it is a primary or contributory cause of death’. Since 2006, coroners in
Ireland have recommended that all deaths from MRSA should be reported prior to the signing
of the death certifi cate. The Coroner Service clearly states that the coroner should be informed
of any death associated with HCAI.
In England and Wales, it has been shown that the number of death certifi cates indicating MRSA
as a cause or contributory factor to death saw a sustained increase from 51 in 1993 to 1,652 in
2006, with a slight decrease to 1,593 in 2007 and a further reduction in 2008 (Figure 5).9,10 Some
of this rise in MRSA reporting is likely due to increased awareness and reporting by certifying
doctors and coroners.11
Figure 5: Number of deaths certifi cates mentioning S. aureus by meticillin resistance and
meticillin susceptibility in England and Wales 1993-2008.9
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
MRSA reported on the death certificate as the underlying cause of death
MRSA mentioned as a contributor but not as the underlying cause of death
Num
ber
of
death
s
Years
11
In 2007, a confi dential study of deaths between 2005 and 2007 in patients with MRSA was
undertaken in the UK by the Health Protection Agency (HPA), in collaboration with the Offi ce
for National Statistics (ONS).12 This was a qualitative research study providing an in-depth
description and evaluation of patient and institutional factors leading to the deaths of a small
randomly selected sample of patients following MRSA infection, which occurred in National
Health Service (NHS) hospitals in the UK. The key fi ndings were that the majority of patients
who died following MRSA infection were older: 80% were over 70 years, with only one case
under 50. The patients had other signifi cant health issues: three quarters having at least
two co-morbidities and they were seriously ill, irrespective of their infection, with assessed
predicted life expectancies tending to be short.
The UK Offi ce for National Statistics Death Certifi cate Advisory Group produced specifi c
guidance related to deaths involving infection and communicable diseases, with a specifi c
sub-section on HCAI.13 They advise that where death is due to an infectious aetiology, the
manifestation or body site (e.g. pneumonia), the infecting organism, antibiotic resistance
(if relevant) and the source or route of infection should be stated, if known.
A recent two year multi-institutional study in Ireland, presented at the November 2008 Irish
Society of Clinical Microbiologists (ISCM) Autumn Scientifi c Meeting, shows similar reporting
shortcomings in death certifi cation. This suggests that like England and Wales, death
certifi cation data is unlikely to be a reliable tool for surveillance of MRSA related mortality in
this country.
12
3 The economic impact of MRSA
related infection and colonisation
3.1 Costs to the health system
A full analysis of the cost of MRSA to the Irish healthcare system has not been carried out,
but the factors contributing to direct hospital costs of HCAI are well known. The main factor
contributing to increased costs is length of stay, accounting for an average of 11 extra days in
hospital. A UK study conducted in one district general hospital in 2000 reported:15
the cost of treating patients with one or more HCAI was 2.8 times greater than for *
non-infected patients, with an average additional cost of £2,917 (€3,221) per case.
patients who acquired an infection stayed in hospital 2.5 times longer than other patients, *
averaging 11 additional days in hospital.
patients who acquired an infection in hospital were 7.1 times more likely than uninfected *
patients to die in hospital.
The HSE calculated that of the order of 25,000 patients may acquire HCAI annually based on
the HIS point prevalence study.5 This number of HCAI could account for approximately 275,000
additional bed days (assuming 11 additional days in hospital per patient).
Taking an average of €850 per day,16 the additional hospital expenditure due to HCAI is
approximately €233.75 million. If 10% of HCAI is due to MRSA, it follows that MRSA infection
in the hospital setting alone costs €23 million annually. The actual fi gure may be higher than
this, given that MRSA is 1.2 to 2 times more expensive to manage than MSSA.17
It has been estimated that approximately one third of HCAI is preventable18 therefore the
potential saving from preventable MRSA infection in Ireland is approximately €7.6 million.
There is a further healthcare cost related to HCAI following discharge from hospital. These
patients have greater contact with their general practitioner, more frequent hospital outpatient
visits and more frequent visits from the public health nurse, adding to the cost to the
healthcare system.15
13
3.2 Costs to patients, carers and the economy
This UK study demonstrated a signifi cant impact of HCAI on costs generally:15
Patients with HCAI took up to 17 additional days to return to their normal daily activities, *
compared to those without HCAI.
Those in paid employment took an average of six extra days to return to work if they acquired *
HCAI, with an estimated cost of up to £800 (€883) per patient.
Patients with HCAI, particularly those with infections identifi ed post-discharge, received more *
care from informal carers (i.e. family members or friends) than did those without HCAI. The
average additional need for such care for those with both pre - and post-discharge infections
was six days, costing £454 (€501) per patient.
Despite the global impact of HCAI, most economic analyses evaluate the direct costs of HCAI
primarily from a hospital perspective. Few consider the indirect costs of healthcare-associated
infections on the patient community and broader society and indeed the intangible costs of the
impact on patient quality of life.
At a national level, the lost output resulting from HCAI has an impact on gross domestic
product. There are no fi gures in Ireland to refl ect that impact but in the UK the global cost has
been estimated at between £3 billion and £11 billion annually.19 A pro-rata fi gure would apply
to Ireland.
MRSA infection in the
hospital setting costs
€23 million annually.
14
4 The prevention and control of
MRSA colonisation and infection
The Report of the Consensus Conference on Antibiotic Resistance; Prevention and Control
(ARPAC) highlighted the importance of infection prevention and control and prudent
antimicrobial use in preventing and controlling MRSA.20
4.1 Infection prevention and control
A general principle of individual and corporate responsibility for infection prevention and
control (IPC) applies. IPC is the responsibility of every healthcare worker, but it must also be
placed at the top of the corporate agenda. It should be regarded as a key quality indicator
and should be adequately resourced. Patients can play an important role. They should expect
those who care for them to be fully compliant with infection control procedures at all times.
Healthcare systems should seek to empower patients and staff to speak out, if the need arises.
In 2000, the Department of Health and Children recognised the need to focus on the prevention
of HCAI in general and on MRSA in particular. The Strategy for the Control of Antimicrobial
Resistance (SARI) was published in 2001 and since then a series of recommendations relating to
the prevention of HCAI have been produced by the Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC).
The following are some of the published guidelines in Ireland for prevention and/or
control of MRSA:
Control and Prevention of MRSA in Hospitals and in the Community 2005.• 21
Guidelines for Hand Hygiene in Irish Health Care Settings 2005.• 22
Infection Prevention and Control Building Guidelines for Acute Hospitals in Ireland 2009• .23
Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infection in Ireland• 2009.24
The following are in development:
Guidelines for the Prevention of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia*
Guidelines for the Prevention of Urinary Catheter Infections*
Health Information and Quality Authority• (HIQA): National Standards for the Prevention and
Control of Healthcare-Associated Infections was published in 2009.25 There are twelve
standards encompassing HCAI governance including the following:
physical environment of the healthcare facility »
staff resource requirement »
hand hygiene »
management of outbreaks »
HCAI surveillance »
microbiology services »
antimicrobial stewardship »
15
4.2 Antimicrobial consumption
Antimicrobial consumption in Ireland is relatively high in comparison to other EU countries.26
Consumption of antimicrobials in public acute hospitals in Ireland 2008 was calculated at an
average use of 76.4 defi ned daily doses (DDD) per 1000 occupied in-patient bed days.27 This
was a 5% decrease from 2007, which may refl ect the deployment of additional resources in
hospitals to implement antimicrobial stewardship initiatives.
The DDD per bed days or per head of population is an internationally recognised unit of
antibiotic consumption, while accounting for activity (bed days) or population size. It can be
used to compare usage between hospitals, regions or countries. Interpreting this rate must be
done with caution, as it does not take account of the case-mix within the hospital or the nature
of the population in the hospitals’ catchment area (i.e. a young or an aged population).
A hospital with a very high rate of antimicrobial consumption may have a large intensive care
unit, a haematology unit or a transplant unit requiring high-level use of antibiotics. A hospital
with a very low rate may have such a rate because it does not have any of these high-use
specialties and not because it has more prudent prescribing of antibiotics. Nevertheless the
DDD per bed days is an extremely useful rate to allow a basic comparison of consumption;
however it is most useful when comparing trends over time within an individual hospital or ward.
The overall outpatient antibiotic consumption for Ireland in 2008 was 21.5 defi ned daily doses
per 1000 inhabitants (DID), a fall from the previous years rate of 22.4 DID, the fi rst decrease
since 2000.27 This rate is mid-to-high in European terms.26 Preliminary estimates of overall
outpatient antibiotic consumption for the fi rst half of 2009 was 20.3 DID.28
4.3 Improving the prescribing of antimicrobials
The 2001 Strategy for the Control of Antimicrobial Resistance in Ireland (SARI) placed
a particular emphasis on appropriate prescribing of antimicrobials. The importance of
antimicrobial stewardship in limiting the emergence of MRSA and other resistant pathogens
in both the hospital and the community setting is well documented internationally and is
highlighted by both the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland (RCPI) and by HIQA. This
document makes recommendations on the structure and organisation of antimicrobial
stewardship in hospitals, the key antimicrobial stewardship interventions and examples of other
interventions that can be carried out to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use. The Guidelines for
Antimicrobial Stewardship in Hospitals in Ireland were updated in 2009.29
16
15
Once medically fi t, patients with
MRSA infection can be discharged.
18
5 The management of MRSA
infection and colonisation
5.1 Communication with patients about their MRSA status
Patients must be advised of their MRSA status by their medical team and are entitled to expect
complete confi dentiality. With the patients’ consent, their MRSA status may be discussed
with nominated relatives or friends to ensure that they have appropriate information. In some
circumstances, where the patient is unable to consent to release of information, consideration
should be given to how essential information can be provided to carers, with due regard to the
patients’ right to privacy.
Informing patients should be done as sensitively as possible and a patient information leafl et
should be provided. Adequate documentation should be maintained. There should be an
opportunity for questions and patients should be advised that any further issues which arise
can be addressed in the future. In respect of signs used in health care facilities to alert health
care workers to the need for extra infection control precautions when entering specifi c rooms
or areas, patient confi dentiality should be respected to the greatest extent possible.
19
5.2 Treatment of S. aureus infection
A number of different antibiotics are used to treat MRSA infection, including those with specifi c
licenses for MRSA and other older drugs, which may not have a specifi c license but which are
widely regarded as effective.
Table 1: Selected commonly used antibiotics to treat MRSA infection
Formulation of Antibiotic
Oral Only Oral and Intravenous Intravenous Only Topical Agents
Nitrofurantoin
(UTI only)
Tetracycline
Trimethoprim
Clindamycin
Co-trimoxazole
Erythromycin
Fusidic acid
Linezolid
Rifampicin
Daptomycin
Gentamicin
Quinupristin/
dalfopristin
Teicoplanin
Tigeycycline
Vancomycin
Chloramphenicol
Fusidic acid
Mupirocin
Neomycin
As with any medicine, antibiotics may cause adverse events. It may be appropriate to initiate
treatment with a broad-spectrum agent and streamline to a more specifi c antibiotic when
susceptibility profi le results are available and the overall clinical picture is clearer.
5.3 Eradication of MRSA carriage
Patients colonised with MRSA who are due to undergo an elective surgical procedure, have
a prosthesis in situ or are in a clinical area where there is a high risk of colonisation leading to
invasive infection, e.g. the ICU, should be evaluated for decolonisation.21 A risk assessment of
other patients such as long-stay patients or patients with chronic nasal colonisation should be
carried out to determine if nasal decolonisation should be attempted. However, excessive use
of nasal decolonisation agents should be avoided, as this can lead to the emergence
of resistance.
Decolonisation often involves the application of 2% mupirocin in paraffi n base to the inner
surface of each nostril three times daily for fi ve days. The patient should be rescreened for
MRSA 48 hours after completing a course of treatment. If the swab remains positive for MRSA,
retreatment with mupirocin may be repeated once only. In general and if the patients’ skin
condition allows, patients are also required to bathe daily for fi ve days and shampoo twice
weekly with an antiseptic detergent, such as 4% chlorhexidine, or 7.5% povidone-iodine.
In some circumstances, as in the case of infants or patients with throat carriage, attempts at
decolonisation may require additional or alternative measures.
5.4 Hospital discharge of patients with MRSA
Patients colonised or infected with MRSA should be discharged from hospital when their
clinical care no longer requires hospitalisation. In most cases, MRSA colonisation clears over
time once antibiotics have been discontinued,2 particularly in patients with intact skin. Hand
hygiene and normal hygiene standards in the home will help prevent transmission. MRSA does
not usually constitute a signifi cant risk to healthy older people, pregnant women and the
very young.30
There is no contraindication to patients colonised with MRSA being transferred to a residential
or nursing home, once standard precautions are followed. In general, residents with MRSA are
not a signifi cant risk to other residents, staff, visitors or family. It is appropriate to share a room,
once neither occupant has a skin lesion, an indwelling urinary catheter or similar risk factor and
such residents can join others in communal areas once skin lesions are dressed.31
20
5.4.1 Home antibiotic treatment
Traditionally, patients with MRSA infection have been treated in hospital, usually with
intravenous antibiotics, which in some cases may be the only indication for continued
hospitalisation. Switching to an oral antibiotic when appropriate has many advantages, even
for hospitalised patients, and may facilitate earlier discharge.
Studies regarding the impact of oral antibiotic treatment for MRSA infection, compared with
the continuation of intravenous antibiotics have consistently shown reductions in length of stay
for patients receiving oral treatment.32-36 The ‘Going Home’ study demonstrated a reduction
of 1,215 bed days among 64 patients representing a median reduction of 14 days per person
(range 1–84). An additional 511 days of in-patient intravenous therapy were prevented by
switching to oral therapy in patients who could not be discharged home.37
While a number of antibiotic agents are commonly used to treat serious MRSA infection,
many are only available for intravenous use (see table 1). It may be that where a switch to
an oral antibiotic is still not possible, MRSA infection can be treated in the community, using
outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) services, where intravenous antibiotics
are administered in the home by community nurses, patients, carers or outpatient clinic staff.
Microbiology or infectious diseases advice should be sought before starting intravenous
therapy at home. For many years, OPAT has been shown to be a safe, effi cacious and cost
effective way of treating patients with serious bacterial infections in the US.38 Recently, it has
been widely used internationally39 and is associated with favourable clinical, economic, safety
and patient satisfaction outcomes.40
OPAT is less well established in Ireland. A growing number of centres now offer OPAT services
in a variety of forms and for different infections. OPAT use is encouraged, if applicable, in the
current national guidelines for antimicrobial stewardship in hospitals. Community intervention
teams are currently in place in some areas and will administer intravenous antibiotics to
patients in the community, encouraging early discharge.
Patients managed by an infectious diseases physician were discharged earlier than those
cared for by other physicians, as the patient was more likely to receive OPAT or to be switched
to oral antibiotics. The earlier discharge had no effect on patient outcome.41
There is very little health economic analysis of the impact of home treatment of MRSA infection
in Ireland. Most of the studies are from the UK, North America or Australia, but their fi ndings
are consistent in revealing reduced overall costs, compared with in-patient treatment and are
worthy of consideration, as they provide some insight into the potential impact on resource
allocation in Ireland.
22
5.4.2 Discharge planning and HCAI
Despite the fact that many patients with HCAI can be discharged and despite
recommendations and reports to help improve discharge policies, process and procedures,
the reality is that many patients cannot be discharged from acute hospitals due to the lack of
long-term residential care and they remain in the acute setting for longer than required.
An additional problem is the increased risk to those patients of acquiring a HCAI. A small study
at an Irish university hospital showed that the rate of HCAI among delayed discharge patients
was 15%, three times the national average.42 Of the patients with HCAI, two thirds had been
declared medically fi t for discharge but were awaiting long-term care. Figures from the Economic
and Social Research Institute (ESRI) reveal a 58% increase in delayed discharge patients during
the last two years with 900 people now in hospital who are medically fi t for discharge.43
23
Advantages of appropriate discharge with home antibiotic treatment
Patient Benefi ts Hospital Benefi ts
Convalescence in comfort of own home
rather than in hospital
Avoid the discomfort and risk of infection
associated with an intravenous line, when
switched to oral antibiotics
Reduced risk of acquiring HCAI
Potential reduction in rates of HCAI
Improved bed management enabling more
patients to be admitted and treated
Reduced duration of hospital stay,
with associated cost savings
An increased focus on early
discharge with oral treatment
or out-patient based parenteral
treatment provides opportunities
to reduce costs, while ensuring
appropriate treatment. It also offers
benefi ts in terms of quality of life.
25
Conclusion
MRSA was fi rst documented in 1961 and has been a challenge to the Irish health care system
for nearly three decades. There is good evidence that MRSA is a signifi cant problem in Ireland
and the burden of infection is greater here than in many European countries. Increased focus
on the problem in the last number of years has been associated with a welcome decline in the
number of MRSA BSI. This is a positive development but it is not easy to confi rm a clear cause
and effect relationship. There are still signifi cant numbers of patients becoming colonised
with MRSA and in some patients, infection supervenes with signifi cant morbidity and
indeed mortality.
There is also an attendant cost to the healthcare system and therefore prevention of infection
represents a signifi cant potential saving. There have also been advances in diagnosis and
indeed treatment, but these developments are not without additional cost, which in some
cases can be substantial. An increased focus on early discharge with oral treatment or out-
patient based parenteral treatment provides opportunities to reduce costs, while ensuring
appropriate treatment. It also offers benefi ts in terms of quality of life.
While much has been done, there is still much to do and in times of limited resources, it is
crucial that MRSA and other HCAI, continue to feature prominently on the quality agenda.
126
Abbreviations
ARPAC Antibiotic resistance prevention and control
BSI Bloodstream infection
DDD Defi ned daily doses
EARSS European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System
HCAI Healthcare-Associated Infection
HIQA Health Information and Quality Authority
HIS Hospital Infection Society
HPSC Health Protection Surveillance Centre
HSE Health Service Executive
ICU Intensive care unit
MOH Medical Offi cer for Health
MRSA Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
MSSA Meticillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus
NHS National Health Service
NPA National Pharmacy Association
ONS Offi ce for National Statistics
OPAT Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy
RCPI Royal College of Physicians of Ireland
SARI Strategy for the Control of Antimicrobial Resistance in Ireland
UTI Urinary Tract Infection
References
1: Health Service Executive (HSE) & Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC). Factsheets:
MRSA, information for patients and visitors. Clean your hand. Say no to Infection 2008.
Produced on behalf of the Infection Control Sub-Committee of the Strategy for the Control
of Antimicrobial Resistance in Ireland (SARI). Available at: http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/
Publications/HealthProtection/Health_Care_Associated_Infection/HCAI_Leafl et.pdf.
2: Royal College of Physicians of Ireland (RCPI). How to advise patients with a healthcare-
associated infection - guidance for healthcare workers in dealing with patients and members of
the public. June 2009. Available at: http://www.rcpi.ie/News/Documents/RCPI%20Policy%20
Group_Advise%20%20Guidance%20for%20Healthcare%20Workers_Final.pdf.
3: Emmerson AM et al. The Second National Prevalence Survey of infection in hospitals –
overview of the results. Journal of Hospital Infection 1996; 32(3):175–90.
4: Smyth ETM., McIlvenny G et al. and on behalf of the Hospital Infection Society Prevalence
Survey Steering Group. Four Country Healthcare Associated Infection Prevalence Survey 2006:
overview of the results. Journal of Hospital Infection 2008; 69(3): 230–248.
5: Health Service Executive. Infection Control Action Plan. The Prevention and Control of HCAI
in Ireland. Background Briefi ng, March 2007.
6: HPSC. Surveillance of MRSA in General Intensive Care Units: First Annual Report 2008.
August 2009. Available at: http://www.hpsc.ie/hpsc/A-Z/MicrobiologyAntimicrobialResistance/
EuropeanAntimicrobialResistanceSurveillanceSystemEARSS/
ReferenceandEducationalResourceMaterial/SaureusMRSA/MRSAinICUPrevalenceStudy/
Reports/File,3918,en.pdf.
7: European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (EARRS). EARRS Annual Report
2008. Bilthoven, The Netherlands: EARSS, October 2009. Available at: http://www.rivm.nl/
earss/Images/EARSS%202008_fi nal_tcm61-65020.pdf.
8: Antimicrobial resistance surveillance in Ireland, Results of invasive Staphylococcus aureus
infection (blood) surveillance (2009Q1-3) http://rivm.nl/earss/database.
9: UK, Offi ce for National Statistics. MRSA deaths decrease for second year running. Report
published in August 2009. Available at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/nugget.asp?ID=1067.
10: UK, Offi ce for National Statistics. Deaths involving MRSA: England and Wales, 2008. Report
published in August 2009. Available at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/mrsa0809.pdf.
11: UK, Offi ce for National Statistics. Death certifi cation following MRSA bacteraemia, England,
2004-2005. Health Statistics Quarterly, Spring 2009. Available at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/
articles/hsq/HSQ41MRSAbacteraemia.pdf.
12: UK, Health Protection Agency and Offi ce for National Statistics. National confi dential
study of deaths following meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection. Report
published September 2006, updated July 2008. Available at: http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/
HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1200660055878.
27
12228
13: UK, Offi ce for National Statistics. Guidance for doctors certifying cause of death. April
2005. From the Offi ce for National Statistics’ Death Certifi cation Advisory Group. Available at:
http://www.nc-hi.com/pdf%20fi les/certifi ers_guidance_v2_tcm69-21289.pdf.
14: O’Donovan BG, Armstrong P, Byrne MC, Murphy AW; on behalf of the Donegal Specialist
Training Programme in General Practice. A mixed-methods prospective study of death
certifi cation in general practice. Family Practice. 2010 (Epub ahead of print).
15: Plowman R, Graves N, Griffi n M et al. The socio-economic burden of hospital acquired
infection. London: Public Health Laboratory Service, 2000. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/
en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4007756.
16: Cotter PE, Timmons S et al. The fi nancial implications of falls in older people for an acute
hospital. Irish Journal of Medical Science 2006; 175(2): 11–13. Available at: http://www.ijms.ie/
Portals/_IJMS/Documents/OP-1143.pdf, p. 12(cost of bed day in Ireland).
17: The MRSA: Separating Facts from Fiction Working Group. MRSA: Separating Fact from
Fiction. January 2008. Available at: http://www.nc-hi.com/pdf%20fi les/pfi zer/MRSA%20
Separating%20fact%20from%20fi ction%20report%20(2).pdf, p.22.
18: Carlet J, Astagneau P et al. French national program for prevention of healthcare-
associated infections and antimicrobial resistance, 1992-2008: positive trends, but
perseverance needed. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 2009; 30(8): 737–745.
19: Gould IM. Costs of hospital-acquired meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)
and its control. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 2006; 28: 379–384.
20: MacKenzie FM, Struelens MJ et al. Report of the Consensus Conference of Antibiotic
Resistance; Prevention and Control (ARPAC). Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2005; 11:
938-954.
21: HSE, HPSC. The Control and Prevention of MRSA in Hospitals and
in the Community, 2005. Published on behalf of SARI. Available at:
http://www.hpsc.ie/hpsc/A-Z/MicrobiologyAntimicrobialResistance/
EuropeanAntimicrobialResistanceSurveillanceSystemEARSS/
ReferenceandEducationalResourceMaterial/SaureusMRSA/Guidance/File,1048,en.pdf.
22: HSE, HPSC. Guidelines for Hand Hygiene in Irish Health care settings, 2005. Published on
behalf of SARI. Available at: http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Publications/HealthProtection/
Health_Care_Associated_Infection/Guidelines_for_Hand_Hygiene_in_Irish_Health_Care_
Settings_2005.pdf.
23: HSE, HPSC. Infection Prevention and Control Building. Guidelines for Acute Hospitals
in Ireland, 2009. Published on behalf of SARI. Available at: http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/
Publications/HealthProtection/Health_Care_Associated_Infection/SARI_Building_Guidelines_
Acute_Hospitals_Jan_2009.pdf.
24: HSE, HPSC. Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infection, 2009 (updated
February 2010). Published on behalf of SARI. Available at: http://www.hpsc.ie/hpsc/A-Z/
MicrobiologyAntimicrobialResistance/InfectionControlandHealthcare-AssociatedInfection/
IntravascularIVlines/Publications/File,4115,en.pdf.
29
25: Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA). National Standards for the Prevention and
Control of Healthcare Associated Infections, 2009. Available at: http://www.hiqa.ie/media/pdfs/
National_Standards_Prevention_Control_Infections.pdf.
26: European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption. Available at: http://app.esac.ua.ac.
be/public/index.php/en gb/antibiotic/antibiotic-consumption (accessed March 2010).
27: Health Protection Surveillance Centre. Annual Report 2008. Available at: http://www.ndsc.
ie/hpsc/AboutHPSC/AnnualReports/File,4080,en.pdf, p. 97.
28: Health Protection Surveillance Centre. Disease Surveillance Report – Outpatient antibiotic
use in Ireland in the fi rst half of 2009. Epi-Insight 2009; 10 (11). Available at: http://ndsc.
newsweaver.ie/newepiinsight/1gdwsue54uhugy02fl xkl0 (accessed March 2010).
29: HSE, HPSC. Guidelines for Antimicrobial Stewardship in Hospitals
in Ireland. December 2009. Published on behalf of SARI. Available at:
http://www.hpsc.ie/hpsc/A-Z/MicrobiologyAntimicrobialResistance/
StrategyforthecontrolofAntimicrobialResistanceinIrelandSARI/AntibioticStewardship/
Publications/File,4116,en.pdf.
30: Health Protection Agency. MRSA: information for patients. London: HPA, 2006.
31: UK Department of Health. MRSA – what nursing and residential homes need to know.
London: DH, 1996. Available at www.dh.gov.uk/en/ Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/
PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4009587.
32: Parodi S, Rhew DC, Goetz MB. Early switch and early discharge opportunities in
intravenous vancomycin treatment of suspected meticillin-resistant staphylococcal species
infections. Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy 2003; 9: 317–326.
33: Sharpe JN, Shively EH, Polk HC. Clinical and economic outcomes of oral linezolid versus
intravenous vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA-complicated lower-extremity skin and soft-
tissue infections caused by meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. American Journal of
Surgery 2005; 189: 425–428.
34: Li Z, Willke RJ, Pinto LA, Rittenhouse BE et al. Comparison of length of hospital stay for
patients with known or suspected meticillin resistant Staphylococcus species infections treated
with linezolid or vancomycin: a randomized, multicentre trial. Pharmacotherapy 2001; 21:
263–274.
35: Itani KMF, Weigelt J, Li JZ, Duttagupta S. Linezolid reduces length of stay and duration
of intravenous treatment compared with vancomycin for complicated skin and soft tissue
infections due to suspected or proven meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 2005; 26: 442–448.
36: McKinnon PS, Sorensen SV, Liu LZ and Itani KMF. Impact of linezolid on economic
outcomes and determinants of cost in a clinical trial evaluating patients with MRSA
complicated skin and soft tissue infections. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2006; 40:
1017–1023.
1
37: Desai M, Franklin BD, Saunderson F et al. Pharmacist led antibiotic intervention optimises
IV to oral switch and discharge to outpatient management in resistant gram-positive infections
Abstract P042, Cardiff, November 2007.
38: Tice AD, Rehm SJ, Dalovisio JR, et al. Practice guidelines for parenteral antibiotic therapy.
Clinical Infectious Diseases 2004; 38: 1651–1672.
39: Nathwani D, Zambrowski JJ, on behalf of the AdHOC Workshop. Advisory group on
Homebased and Outpatient Care (AdHOC): an international consensus statement on non
in-patient parenteral therapy. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2000; 6: 464–476.
40: Nathwani D, Tice A. Ambulatory antimicrobial use: the value of an outcomes registry.
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2002; 49: 149–154.
41: Eron LJ, Passos S. Early discharge of infected patients through appropriate antibiotic use.
Archives of Internal Medicine 2001; 161: 61–65.
42: HCAI infection in long-stay patients in University Hospital. Presented at 2009 Annual
Scientifi c Meeting, Infectious Diseases Society of Ireland (IDSI).
43: Activity in Acute Public Hospitals in Ireland AnnuL Report 2007 (September 2009).
Available at http://www.esri.ie/health_information/latest_hipe_nprs_reports/2007.
30
